Toronto Escorts

Democrats say Obama should invoke 14th Amendment to Avert Default!

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,024
5,978
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Fuck them radical pig-headed inbred teabaggers and GOPers who want to drive the USA into Default for the first time in history! Obama is about to do an 'end around' these rabid obstructionist cement-heads! Obama is about to show these conservative cretins he can invoke little known parts of the US Constitution, just as Dubya and his DICK DID in the past! It's the reasonable, rational, sensible and Patriotic thing to do! Something our myopic radical partisan troglodytes on the right know nothing of!....:rolleyes:

Democrats say Obama should invoke 14th Amendment

By JIM ABRAMS - Associated Press Jul 27, 2011 09:27 PM

WASHINGTON -- House Democrats said Wednesday that President Barack Obama should invoke a little-known constitutional provision to prevent the nation from going into default if Congress fails to come up with a plan to raise the debt ceiling.

Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, a member of the Democratic leadership, said he told fellow Democrats that Obama should both veto any House GOP plan for a short-term extension of the debt ceiling and invoke the 14th amendment, which says that the validity of the nation's public debt "shall not be questioned."

The White House has rejected resorting to this tactic to keep the nation from defaulting, questioning its legality, but Rep. John Larson of Connecticut, who chairs the Democratic caucus, said "we're getting down to decision time" and "we have to have a failsafe mechanism and we believe that failsafe mechanism is the 14th Amendment and the president of the United States."

Larson said Clyburn's proposal on the 14th Amendment was met with applause by other Democrats at their meeting.

White House spokesman Jay Carney, asked about Clyburn's proposal, said only Congress has the authority to extend the government's borrowing authority. "The president does not have authority to raise the debt ceiling. It's not a plausible way to address this problem and we do not think it is an option," he said.

The Democratic leaders said the vast majority in their party still support a plan for raising the debt ceiling and cutting spending put forth by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. But they said the inability of the government to pay its debts could drive up interest rates and affect millions of Americans forced to pay higher mortgages and higher interest on student loans.

Rep. Xavier Becerra of California, the assistant caucus chair, said Democrats are telling Obama, "Mr. President, Republicans through their failure have given you license to do whatever it takes to not let the American family go down into that abyss with House Republicans."

The post-Civil War 14th Amendment guaranteeing citizenship to all people born or naturalized in the United States contains a provision that "the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

Some legal scholars have said the president can invoke that clause to keep the nation from defaulting on the debt, although there is no legal precedent for such an action.

Democrats say Obama should invoke 14th Amendment to Avert Default!
 

LancsLad

Unstable Element
Jan 15, 2004
18,096
0
0
In a very dark place
Tough on the muslame kenyan when he doesn't get his own way. Not enough chicago thugs to go around?????



.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,024
5,978
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Tough on the muslame kenyan when he doesn't get his own way. Not enough chicago thugs to go around?????
Obama is about to show dem White-Robed GOPer Klansmen a lesson in politics......Chicago Style!

Time to ROCK & ROLL!!!....:cool:
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
The only problem is that most legal scholars agree that the 14th Amendment gives the President no such power.


Futher, that the provision of the 14th Amendment in question refered to Civil War Union Army pensions.
 

Scarey

Well-known member
The only problem is that most legal scholars agree that the 14th Amendment gives the President no such power.


Futher, that the provision of the 14th Amendment in question refered to Civil War Union Army pensions.
True, but the second amendment concerning the right to bear arms references a"a well regulated militia"that is very rarely referenced.Now having said that, District of Columbia V. Heller gave some leeway on that.However,any legal objections to the 14th amendment should be given the same legal due process.
For the past decade presidental interpretation seems to have prevailed for the record.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,087
1
0
I just laugh at the GOP and their indignant stances over the increases. Reagan raised the ceiling how many times and how much did the debt and deficit increase, likewise with Bush? Their selective memory is laughable if it wasn't able to bring hell down upon us.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
True, but the second amendment concerning the right to bear arms references a"a well regulated militia"that is very rarely referenced.Now having said that, District of Columbia V. Heller gave some leeway on that.However,any legal objections to the 14th amendment should be given the same legal due process.
For the past decade presidental interpretation seems to have prevailed for the record.
Although the matter had not previously come up to the USSC, there was a heck of a lot of historical record on firearms ownership in the U.S.

There is no such record on this clause of the 14th Amendment.

Article I, clause 7 clearly states that spending bills are the prerogative of the House of Representatives.

Further the President should he take such an action knows very well that Impeachment might well be a result.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,087
1
0
You aren't listening to public sentiment about the level of the federal debt.
It's hard to separate informed public opinion from the white noise of idiots, so don't hold that against me. The gist of what I'm hearing is shifting against the GOP/Teabaggers. I have said I agree with getting spending 'back to manageable level, but you can't do in one term without dire consequences to those who least can afford it.
 

Scarey

Well-known member
Considering the previous administrations interpretations concerning the constitution i would guess one of the very FEW things the democrats would fight tooth and tail on would be an impeachment process of any democratic president ever again.

This is probably the best detailed case against GWB

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/181312.The_Case_for_Impeachment
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
This would be consistent with his fondness for czars....

OTB
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
Considering the previous administrations interpretations concerning the constitution i would guess one of the very FEW things the democrats would fight tooth and tail on would be an impeachment process of any democratic president ever again.
They don't have enough votes to prevent Impeachment, conviction yes, Impeachment no.
 

Cobster

New member
Apr 29, 2002
10,422
0
0
Tough on the muslame kenyan when he doesn't get his own way. Not enough chicago thugs to go around?????
Looks like little Lancsy has been off his meds for quite awhile and hasn't seen his shrink as well.
 

Cobster

New member
Apr 29, 2002
10,422
0
0
After the long Texas piss that was taken on the constitution circa 2000-2008 using it to do the deal seems very fitting...........excellent idea.

lol so true.
Bush basically flipped his finger to the Constitution didn't he....
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,358
4,779
113
I just laugh at the GOP and their indignant stances over the increases. Reagan raised the ceiling how many times and how much did the debt and deficit increase, likewise with Bush? Their selective memory is laughable if it wasn't able to bring hell down upon us.
It is a completely phony issue. Congress has voted to approve all the expenses already.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,024
5,978
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
You aren't listening to public sentiment about the level of the federal debt.
And YOU aren't listening to the majority of people in the USA and the World who back Obama as being very reasonable here, and think GOPers are acting like a rabid pack of irresponsible partisan ARSEHOLES!...:eyebrows:

Reagan raised the debt ceiling 17 times!
Dubya did the same 7 times!

GOPers again, are being TOTAL hypocrites here!
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts